lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Auto-transposition


From: David Wright
Subject: Re: Auto-transposition
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 10:08:10 -0600
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)

On Fri 15 Dec 2017 at 15:52:28 (+0000), Wols Lists wrote:
> On 15/12/17 13:45, David Wright wrote:
> > On Fri 15 Dec 2017 at 10:02:19 (+0000), Wols Lists wrote:
> >> On 15/12/17 06:20, Saul Tobin wrote:
> >>> Relative mode makes perfect sense if you're entering music that cares
> >>> mainly about the relationship between notes within a phrase (i.e. most
> >>> music). IMO absolute mode might be easier from the perspective of the
> >>> software, but it's not how most musicians think, and that's
> >>> important. Maybe the documentation could do a better job explaining the
> >>> semantics of relative mode and when to use \resetRelativeOctave?
> >>>
> >>> I take exception to the idea that relative mode ought to be deprecated.
> >>> I've been using exclusively relative mode to compose for almost ten
> >>> years, and I think it's great.
> >>
> >> I think Han-Wen actually wrote \resetRelativeOctave for me :-)
> >>
> >> But if you don't understand relative then it will mess you up.
> >>
> >> Does anybody (not me :-) want to write a little update for the docu that
> >> will make both relative mode and \resetRelativeOctave (hopefully) clear?
> >>
> >> It originated when I was (iirc) transcribing Chattanooga Choo-Choo, and
> >> there's a repeated phrase, so I thought I'd define it as a variable.
> >> OOOPPSS! The starting and ending notes are a fifth or more apart, and
> >> the phrase repeats with nothing else in-between. The resulting staircase
> >> was spectacular!
> >>
> >> If somebody would care to take that as hint for putting an example in
> >> the docu, that's fine by me! :-)
> > 
> > Just use \relative early.
> > 
> I was thinking more along the lines of (note this is NOT TESTED)
> 
> phrase = { c f d g }
> 
> \relative { \phrase \phrase \phrase }

Yes, that's exactly the problem with putting \relative around
constructions rather than the variables themselves, illustrated
by "mover".

> \relative { \resetRelativeOctave \phrase \resetRelativeOctave \phrase
> \resetRelativeOctave \phrase }

Each \resetRelativeOctave needs a pitch to set the octave, but, yes,
that is one way of dealing with the issue. A benefit is that you get
the chance to modify the octavation at each repetition, but that
benefit could also be achieved with \transpose c c' additions instead.

But the solution shown by "stayer" is simpler and more elegant, and
will also make any deliberate octavation changes more obvious in
the source.

Cheers,
David.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]